Despite the popularity of fungi as eukaryotic model systems, several questions on their phylogenetic relationships continue to be controversial. These include the classification of zygomycetes that are potentially paraphyletic, i.e. a combination of several not directly related fungal lineages. The phylogenetic position of Schizosaccharomyces species has also been controversial: do they belong to Taphrinomycotina (previously known as archiascomycetes) as predicted by analyses with nuclear genes, or are they instead related to Saccharomycotina (budding yeast) as in mitochondrial phylogenies? Another question concerns the precise phylogenetic position of nucleariids, a group of amoeboid eukaryotes that are believed to be close relatives of Fungi. Previously conducted multi-gene analyses have been inconclusive, because of limited taxon sampling and the use of only six nuclear genes.
We have addressed these issues by assembling phylogenomic nuclear and mitochondrial datasets for phylogenetic inference and statistical testing. According to our results zygomycetes appear to be paraphyletic (Chapter 2), but the phylogenetic signal in the available mitochondrial dataset is insufficient for resolving their branching order with statistical confidence. In Chapter 3 we show with a large nuclear dataset (more than 100 proteins) and conclusive supports that Schizosaccharomyces species are part of Taphrinomycotina. We further demonstrate that the conflicting grouping of Schizosaccharomyces with budding yeasts, obtained with mitochondrial sequences, results from a phylogenetic error known as long-branch attraction (LBA, a common artifact that leads to the regrouping of species with high evolutionary rates irrespective of their true phylogenetic positions). In Chapter 4, using again a large nuclear dataset we demonstrate with significant
statistical support that nucleariids are the closest known relatives of Fungi. We also confirm paraphyly of traditional zygomycetes as previously suggested, with significant support, but without placing all members of this group with confidence. Our results question aspects of a recent taxonomical reclassification of zygomycetes and their chytridiomycete neighbors (a group of zoospore-producing Fungi).
Overcoming or minimizing phylogenetic artifacts such as LBA has been among our most recurring questions. We have therefore developed a new method (Chapter 5) that identifies and eliminates sequence sites with highly uneven evolutionary rates (highly heterotachous sites, or HH sites) that are known to contribute significantly to LBA. Our method is based on a likelihood ratio test (LRT). Two previously published datasets are used to demonstrate that gradual removal of HH sites in fast-evolving species (suspected for LBA) significantly increases the support for the expected ‘true’ topology, in a more effective way than comparable, published methods of sequence site removal. Yet in general, data manipulation prior to analysis is far from ideal. Future development should aim at integration of HH site identification and weighting into the phylogenetic inference process itself.